Filenews 29 August 2021 - byVassos Vassiliou
The amount of destruction caused by fires that break out from houses in or around forests are frightening, when you consider that 11 out of 100 fall into this category. But 11% is not just a figure if one considers that in the case of the fire in Solia in 2016, an area of forest of 18.5 square kilometres was burned.
It is worth noting that, according to the statistics of the Department of Forests, fires of this category are the third cause of fires. It is also noteworthy that 80% of the houses that were damaged in the last big fire, were erected without permission.
The sample (11%) is not isolated, i.e. it was not only isolated from a year in which many fires were caused, but is included in the statistics of the Department of Forests covering the period 2000-2020 during which 3,178 fires broke out in or around the forests at a distance of up to two kilometres from them. Based on the numbers and percentages, it appears that in total, during the above period, about 349 fires broke out from residences.
The dwellings from which a fire breaks out are mainly "isolated dwellings", i.e. houses "cut off" from the communities in which they fall administratively and, for some time now, those involved, including the Interior Minister, have been seeking to place further restrictions (in addition to those which have already been put in place) on the approval of applications for the construction of such dwellings and whether it was a way to prevent them from being built completely. However, the task is not easy, if we take into account that perhaps thousands of plots were mortgaged or even sold at increased prices (in relation to their real value) with the prospect that they were no longer just fields but theoretically acquired the prospect of "development", so when abolishing the policy of individual housing would perhaps also affect the banks, which agreed to mortgage the affected land to multiples of the value they had and actually have.
Of course, the only concern for the government in question is not to protect forests from the fires that break out from individual houses, because if that were indeed the concern, they would listen to the voices of protest of all those who reacted, not to the approval of individual housing in the name of the poor inhabitants of the countryside, but to the overflow of this policy, with the result that the forests are filled, the hills, the peaks and not only, with luxurious villas. One of the concerns is the gradual creation of infrastructure (transportation of electricity, water, up to schools or other services), over time, in order to meet the needs. And now several of the owners of the individual houses are foreigners, to whom various land developers have sold individual houses, who are the ones who have certainly benefited from this policy.
The above are not speculations and the Minister of Interior Nikos Nouris said it better before the Parliamentary Committee on the Interior, when members of parliament raised the issue of individual residence in order to continue this policy in the name of the poor rural residents.
As the minister mentioned, to date, outside the development limits, about 10,000 permits have been issued for the construction of an individual house. He also said that large fires broke out from individual houses, including that of Solia.
He also suggested that valuable agricultural land is being lost and the cost of services to the communities, which is ultimately borne by the inhabitants of the countryside, is increasing. In addition, areas are occupied which could be used to accommodate livestock and other activities. That was not enough, he said, the EU is cursing us to create conditions of social isolation.
Applications for barns and swimming pools
Summarizing the policy of individual residence, Mr. Nouris noted before the Parliament: "Unfortunately, before me, applications arrived before me that did not concern the construction of houses for poor rural residents, but for barns with swimming pools measuring 8 by 4 meters."
Commenting on reports by MPs that "before the criteria for approving the construction of the individual house were tightened, many mortgaged their properties with relatively high values, but now that the value of the land has decreased, they are being asked to mortgage other properties, otherwise they risk being sold off at very low prices", Mr. Nouris remarked that: "The approval of the applications was potential" to add, that "financial institutions had to mortgage these plots based on the value they had taking into account the urban planning zone in which they fell and not on the basis of the perspective they thought existed".
Another aspect raised by the Minister concerns the cost to community residents, who have to pay increased fees. Specifically, he brought as an example the fees paid by the residents of the Municipality of Lefkara, which amount annually to €530 compared to €117 paid by the residents of Mesa Geitonia.
Along with these, according to the minister, there is "a huge waste of good irrigatable land, while, due to individual houses, in some areas livestock farms or other developments cannot be created. Finally, he noted that the EU had decried Cyprus, suggesting that the policy of individual housing creates conditions of social isolation.
When did the... evil
As the Minister of the Interior explained to MPs, individual housing was allowed in 1990, but it was never a given that this exceptional procedure, which was applied on the basis of relying on the accommodation of rural residents (who did not have a plot of land to house themselves or house their children) would continue indefinitely or that every application submitted would be approved.
Just because false expectations have been created does not mean that we should dismantle everything, the interior minister observed. Mr. Nouris also said that control had to be applied so as not to create problems in the countryside.
Moreover, commenting on reports from MPs that the policy pursued favoured capital and not the ordinary rural dweller, he said that developers were favoured before the restrictions that are now in force were introduced, and added: "When they bought land to build second and third houses," yes they were favoured. "Indeed, this policy was implemented to help the low income strata, but in the process this effort that was supposedly made to help the people overflowed and from a social policy turned into a means of speculation", added Mr. Nouris.
The number of licenses
Citing data from the Department of Town Planning, the Interior Minister said that in the period from 1990 to 2008, 6,500 permits were given and added that the Town Planning Department estimates that to date they exceeded 10,000, so, he said, a large number of our compatriots benefited. He also clarified that most applications are approved exceptionally and not by way of derogation. He also said that in 1990 all that was requested for an application to be approved was for the plot to exist before 1/12/1990 and its area was less than 4,000sq.m. As he said, two years later there was a new relaxation and in the year 2000 the limitation of the size of the plot was removed, so that the construction of a house was allowed regardless of the size of the plot.
As he explained, in 2000 an evaluation of the policy followed was made and its findings are the same as the current ones, although the situation has since deteriorated. "Unfortunately, the whole process was turned into a profit-making enterprise", added Mr. Nouris.
Negative first for Cyprus in the EU
In an earlier reply of the Ministry of Interior to the Parliament, the problems caused by the uncontrolled construction of individual houses were listed and studies and statistics were invoked, which "placed Cyprus in the first place (negative record) at a European level in matters of urban sprawl and sealing of the ground, precisely because of the exacerbation of the phenomenon of individual housing".
The restrictions suggested by the chamber
With the aim of drastically limiting the negative effects of the implementation of the individual residence policy and until the final abolition of the above policy, ETEK suggested that all applications submitted should have the following characteristics:
i. All cases will concern proven requests for the first/permanent residence of a family.
ii. There will be special reasons based on economic and social criteria (the applicant must prove that he does not own any other suitable for residential development land within existing urban areas).
iii. Only one residence per piece will be allowed (in case of co-ownership for a plot registered in the books of the Cadastre before 1/12/90, the construction of a second residence will be allowed provided that it corresponds to an area of 4,000 sq. m. (per residence) and all other conditions are met).
iv. The data of the plot will ensure and will not negatively affect its off-limit character development (minimum area of 4000sq.m.).
v. Construction of an individual house will be allowed in plots that are within a distance of about 300m. from a development threshold and provided that they do not fall within environmentally sensitive areas, land consolidation areas, irrigated areas, etc. Particular attention should also be paid to the observance of appropriate distance from designated Protection Zones or other zones where permitted developments may have a negative impact on residential use.
vi. These plots should be adjacent to a registered public road.
vii. The maximum buildable area of residence will not exceed 250sq.m.
viii. A minimum distance of 10 meters from the boundaries of the block shall be observed.
ix. The green concession will be of the order of 20%, while it will be ensured that there will be no impact on the landscape and the terrain of the area from the road network accessing the ownership of the development, but also from the location of the development itself.
The ETEK disagreed
The ETEK had expressed its disagreement with the policy of individual residence over time and in 2014, on the occasion of the process of revising the Chapter "Residential Development" of the Policy Statement, sent a long letter to the then DG of the Ministry of Interior in which it identified the following weaknesses:
i. Undermining the strategic objectives of the Development Plans concerning rational urban planning and planning.
ii. Scattered, uncontrolled and unplanned building development and burdening the country with environmental, economic and social costs.
iii. Waste of productive land and reckless use of non-renewable natural resources that undermine the possibility of rational land use on the basis of future needs and priorities.
iv. Financial burden on the state and by extension on society, a particularly critical point in this period, with the obligation to expand or maintain infrastructure and/or service networks of these units (water supply, electricity, telecommunications-internet), and the undermining of the possibility of creating and sustainable, rational management of support services (e.g. public transport, future natural gas supply networks, etc.) with almost complete dependence on the use of a private car.
v. Strengthening the phenomenon of social isolation.
The ETEK suggested that the policy of individual residence, which may have been aimed at serving the economically weaker classes of the population, has failed since it has not been possible to limit the application of this measure to fully justified and exceptional cases. Instead, the measure is often used to make it easier, among other things, for the more economically affluent classes of the population to proceed with large groups of developments on the periphery of towns and villages with all the negative consequences that have been mentioned above. Therefore, the Chamber strongly supports that the implementation of the policy of individual housing must be terminated and the state should address vulnerable groups of the population through other mechanisms and urban planning tools, such as the further exploitation of active housing policy, through social housing, the utilization of the measure of urban land consolidation, as well as the activation of dormant land within the defined development limits. At the same time, with the abolition of this policy, the perception that compact and concentrated development contributes to social cohesion, the prudent management and protection of the environment, natural resources and cultural heritage, and in general to ensuring the sustainable, balanced and rational development of settlements, should be consolidated in the authorities and in the general public.
